Prev: NEWS: Security shortcomings in WPA2 that threaten security of wireless networks
Next: NEWS: Security shortcomings in WPA2 that threaten security ofwireless networks
From: Jeff Liebermann on 8 Aug 2010 16:06
On Sun, 08 Aug 2010 11:13:10 -0700, SMS <scharf.steven(a)geemail.com>
wrote:

>On 08/08/10 10:47 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>
>> No kidding. I've seen duplicated surveys, where the same users can't
>> even supply the same responses a week later. Garbage in, statistics
>> out. Still, it's the best we have to work with.
>
>What's important are the relative numbers.

Relative to what? Dropped calls to airtime? Dropped calls to number
of calls attempted? Dropped calls to number of calls received? Calls
going to voice mail instead of ringing? Calls in fixed locations or
while moving (i.e. handoff)? Urban jungle or wide open country?
Voice, data, or both? VoIP calls? Tethered or non-tethered? GSM or
CDMA2000? Including NanoCellular calls? It's all garbage, but once
the data has been passed through a computer, it looks so nice and
neat, it's difficult to suggest that the results might be useless.

>as the "fewest dropped calls" survey used by Cingular in its
>ads a few years ago shows (even the organization that conducted the
>survey disputed Cingular's conclusions that they used in their ads).

Cingular/AT&T knows exactly how many calls are dropped and probably
justifiably recognized that they had a problem. I guess TV
advertising was deemed cheaper than spending the money on system
upgrades.

--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl(a)cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
From: John Navas on 8 Aug 2010 16:15
On Sun, 08 Aug 2010 12:43:43 -0700, in
<5g0u56pesbealt82grt16jgpkpbhs75t0c(a)4ax.com>, Jeff Liebermann
<jeffl(a)cruzio.com> wrote:

>On Sun, 08 Aug 2010 14:31:40 -0400, ZnU <znu(a)fake.invalid> wrote:
>
>>In article <0vnt569ooulbctshsd5rvjn1177ukrcapb(a)4ax.com>,
>> Jeff Liebermann <jeffl(a)cruzio.com> wrote:

>>> Actually, it does. If all the Android phones were released
>>> simultaneously, it's conceivable that they may all have some common
>>> problem overlooked during the development. However, with the current
>>> staggered release of various models by various vendors, each
>>> succeeding model builds upon the lessons learned by the competitors.
>>> This is the way to make incremental improvements, which are certainly
>>> beneficial to the customer.
>>
>>Can you point to any actual examples of this?
>
>Not within the Android market. They're too new for this kind of
>evolutionary improvements.

I sure can -- each HTC Android handset has been a significant
improvement over the last one, a substantial (and rapid) pace of
incremental development.

>However, there are plenty of examples
>among other cell phone manufacturers. Motorola revolutionized the
>industry with the RAZR and its internal antenna at the bottom of the
>phone. Now, most commodity phones have internal antenna.

Even more relevant is the incremental improvements from one version of
the RAZR to the next of the many versions -- the V3xx, for example, was
a considerable improvement over the original V3.

>HTC
>introduced the slide out keyboard which doesn't waste front panel
>space. Now, almost all PDA phones have sliding keyboards.

Can't give you this one -- Nokia pioneered the full hidden keyboard, and
various phones have different implementations, like the Motorola
Backflip.

>Apple
>decided that mechanical keyboards and stylus's were un-necessary. Now,
>almost all the new phones use an on screen keyboard.

Or this one either:
* Sony Ericsson pioneered the touchscreen concept with the P800 (which
I had) and P900, and
* RIM still leads the smartphone market with mechanical keyboards.

>Apple decided
>that battery life was critical in the iPhone 4. I'm starting to see
>larger phones (in product releases) primarily for the larger screen,
>but also for the larger battery.

Extended batteries were around long before the iPhone 4.

>My point is that all the
>manufacturers borrow good ideas from each other, thus improving the
>product.

True.

>>IOW, the whole thing was a huge Internet echo chamber phenomenon that
>>turns out to be pretty pointless.
>
>Apple was lucky that the problem was somewhat mitigated with a rubber
>bumper. Had it been something more difficult to solve, it could
>easily have been a disaster. However, a good question to ask was how
>could Apple have missed this effect? Could it be that someone
>unilaterally decided that it wasn't a problem and go ship it anyway?

Or that Apple lacked the experience and expertise to find and properly
assess the significance of the problem, which I think more likely given
the backgrounds of the people involved -- Apple would have been better
served by stealing a crack phone engineer away from Motorola than the
IBM engineer who's now been fired for a problem he probably didn't have
the experience and expertise to properly assess.

>I'm not a fanatic or early adopter. I bought the iPod Touch 2G used
>on eBay. The pile of iPhone 3G's I'm accumulating are all from
>upgrades. I don't pay full list or buy much retail.

Amen! Best to be one generation back, both as a matter of value and as
a matter of stability.

--
John

"We have met the enemy and he is us" -Pogo
From: ZnU on 8 Aug 2010 16:16
In article <5g0u56pesbealt82grt16jgpkpbhs75t0c(a)4ax.com>,
Jeff Liebermann <jeffl(a)cruzio.com> wrote:

> On Sun, 08 Aug 2010 14:31:40 -0400, ZnU <znu(a)fake.invalid> wrote:
>
> >In article <0vnt569ooulbctshsd5rvjn1177ukrcapb(a)4ax.com>,
> > Jeff Liebermann <jeffl(a)cruzio.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Sun, 08 Aug 2010 11:15:44 -0400, ZnU <znu(a)fake.invalid> wrote:
> >>
> >> >But this is precisely my point. Having more models doesn't actually mean
> >> >the phone an individual user buys is less likely to have an issue.
> >>
> >> Actually, it does. If all the Android phones were released
> >> simultaneously, it's conceivable that they may all have some common
> >> problem overlooked during the development. However, with the current
> >> staggered release of various models by various vendors, each
> >> succeeding model builds upon the lessons learned by the competitors.
> >> This is the way to make incremental improvements, which are certainly
> >> beneficial to the customer.
> >
> >Can you point to any actual examples of this?
>
> Not within the Android market. They're too new for this kind of
> evolutionary improvements. However, there are plenty of examples
> among other cell phone manufacturers. Motorola revolutionized the
> industry with the RAZR and its internal antenna at the bottom of the
> phone. Now, most commodity phones have internal antenna. HTC
> introduced the slide out keyboard which doesn't waste front panel
> space. Now, almost all PDA phones have sliding keyboards. Apple
> decided that mechanical keyboards and stylus's were un-necessary. Now,
> almost all the new phones use an on screen keyboard. Apple decided
> that battery life was critical in the iPhone 4. I'm starting to see
> larger phones (in product releases) primarily for the larger screen,
> but also for the larger battery. My point is that all the
> manufacturers borrow good ideas from each other, thus improving the
> product.

Yes. But the only time this is an advantage for Android vs. iPhone is if
it can happen faster as a consequence of the fact that Android phones
are released throughout the year while there is only one new iPhone
model per year.

Given the lead times for products this complex, I'm not sure I buy that
vendors can effectively 'borrow' from each other on timescales that
short.

> >IOW, the whole thing was a huge Internet echo chamber phenomenon that
> >turns out to be pretty pointless.
>
> Apple was lucky that the problem was somewhat mitigated with a rubber
> bumper. Had it been something more difficult to solve, it could
> easily have been a disaster.

Meh. Remember, estimates are that Apple earns more profit from phones
than any other company in the entire global cellular industry. They'd
take a bit of a quarterly hit if a recall had been necessary, but they
could afford it.

> However, a good question to ask was how could Apple have missed this
> effect? Could it be that someone unilaterally decided that it wasn't
> a problem and go ship it anyway?

I suspect Apple was aware of the tradeoff being made and decided to make
it anyway on the basis that it didn't impact real-world performance that
much. Which it doesn't seem to.

They clearly failed to anticipate its potential to cause widespread
Internet hysteria.

[snip]

--
"The game of professional investment is intolerably boring and over-exacting to
anyone who is entirely exempt from the gambling instinct; whilst he who has it
must pay to this propensity the appropriate toll." -- John Maynard Keynes
From: nospam on 8 Aug 2010 16:16
In article <dg1u56h7lp1018abdr7rad01rm4mbpgk0n(a)4ax.com>, John Navas
<spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote:

> p.s. App development for iPad and other iDevices is irrelevant in this
> context.

absolutely false. android is an operating system on various devices,
including tablets later this year, so you *can't* ignore the ipod touch
and ipad. unless of course, you have an agenda.
From: ZnU on 8 Aug 2010 16:19
In article <3n2u56du8653880ejo4l47ibgls04nivrn(a)4ax.com>,
John Navas <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote:

> On Sun, 08 Aug 2010 15:16:34 -0400, in
> <znu-67E0CB.15163408082010(a)Port80.Individual.NET>, ZnU
> <znu(a)fake.invalid> wrote:
>
> >In article <v9ut569kkb5soa46241rg2t2jrrehdjcs7(a)4ax.com>,
> > John Navas <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote:
>
> >> HTC model history.
> >> Motorola model history.
> >
> >See, that's exactly the kind of vague nonsense I wasn't asking for.
>
> You don't know the model history of those two major brands?
> (How then can you comment intelligently on the issue?)
> OK, here you go: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Android_devices>

Vague nonsense.

You're pushing the notion that a consequence of staggered releases,
Android phones can borrow from each other sooner. But this only makes
sense if it's possible to see a new feature in a competitor's product
and have it in your product three months later or something. Which, with
products this complex, it probably isn't.

[snip]

> >> Just as there are between iPhone models. Is each iPhone in a separate
> >> class in your opinion? :)
> >
> >The iPhone 4 is certainly in a different class from, say, the iPhone 3G.
>
> Your class distinction, which amounts to iPhone 4 being in a class by
> itself, is meaningless (and self-serving, no offense intended).

Huh? I would say there are a couple of Android phones in the same class,
like the Droid X. (Hardware-wise, anyway. I think iOS is far more
polished than Android.)

What I'm objecting to is that people sort of pretend _all_ Android
handsets are in the same class as the Droid X or iPhone 4.

--
"The game of professional investment is intolerably boring and over-exacting to
anyone who is entirely exempt from the gambling instinct; whilst he who has it
must pay to this propensity the appropriate toll." -- John Maynard Keynes
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64
Prev: NEWS: Security shortcomings in WPA2 that threaten security of wireless networks
Next: NEWS: Security shortcomings in WPA2 that threaten security ofwireless networks